146 Washington — Suggestion for Mineral Nomenclature. 



ending in i or o, for the others. When two bases are of equal 

 importance, present in about equal molecular amounts, the 

 combined full names may be used, though this last might better 

 be reserved for definite double salts, as dolomite. Illustrating 

 the above idea, forsterite would be called magnesium olivinate, 

 most chrysolite f erro-magnesium olivinate, hyalosiderite might 

 be magnesi-ferrous olivinate, and fayalite ferrous olivinate. 



In many minerals, however, several bases are present and in 

 these cases, and even when there are only two, the designation 

 of the base may become long and cumbrous. It may therefore be 

 desirable to have all the bases represented by syllables as com- 

 pact and condensed as possible, so long as this can be done with- 

 out sacrificing clearness. For this purpose it is suggested that 

 the first syllable of the element name may be used, joined 

 together without linking vowels or hyphens, the order being 

 significant of the relative importance, as above. Thus enstatite 

 would be magnesium hypersthenate, bronzite f ermag hypersthe- 

 nate, and a highly ferrous hypersthene magfer hypersthenate. 



With the increasing recognition of the presence of radicals 

 in minerals it becomes necessary, as a matter of convenience, to 

 designate these by short terms, and here we may well follow 

 the lead of organic chemistry, where we find such indispen- 

 sable radical names as ethyl, butyl, phenyl, acetyl, derived from 

 their most prominent compounds. Similarly we might desig- 

 nate the mineral radical, Al(F,OH), essential in topaz, as topyl ; 

 Mg(F, ; OH), present in the chondrodrite series, as chondryl ; 

 and (BOH), which Penfield has shown to be present in tourma- 

 lines, as tourmyl. Such radical names would take the place of 

 element names when present as bases. 



The objection will, of course, be raised against the use of 

 such syllables that they are barbarous, uncouth, and cacopho- 

 nous. In reply to this it may be said that, while they will 

 undoubtedly appear so at first, usage will gradually render 

 them easy, natural, and less awkward. As a case in point 

 may be cited the terminology of organic chemistry, where we 

 find such words as carboxyl, aldoxim, azoxybenzol, glyoxal, 

 phthalisoimide, and a host of others. The same objections 

 could have been, and probably were, raised against these, 

 but to express the lengthy and complicated names of organic 

 compounds the chemist has found such syllables absolutely nec- 

 essary. They are readily understandable and give an imme- 

 diate insight into the composition of the substance, have 

 wholly lost their original " barbarousness," and new ones are 

 freely coined when needed. 



Acid and basic salts present some difficulties, as it is not 

 always possible as yet to determine the function of hydrogen 

 or hydroxyl in minerals. When definitely known to be basic 



